parliament recently passed a law which prescribes for restrictions on the exercise of the fundamenta...........

Legal Reasoning Others

Article 13 in the Constitution of India

13. Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights

1- All laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of this Constitution, in so far as they are inconsistent with the provisions of this Part, shall, to the extent of such inconsistency, be void.

2-The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void

3- In this article, unless the context otherwise requires law includes any Ordinance, order, Bye law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usages having in the territory of India the force of law; laws in force includes laws passed or made by Legislature or other competent authority in the territory of India before the commencement of this Constitution and not previously repealed, notwithstanding that any such law or any part thereof may not be then in operation either at all or in particular areas

4-Nothing in this article shall apply to any amendment of this Constitution made under Article 368 Right of Equality

parliament recently passed a law which prescribes for restrictions on the exercise of the fundamental rights. Which of the following statement is incorrect with respect to passage?

The law passed by the parliament is null and void on the account of article 13.

The law passed by the parliament isn’t in contravention of fundamental rights.

Only judicial test could determine the constitutional validity of the law.

None of the above.

Explanation:

Nothing in this article shall apply to any amendment of this Constitution made under Article 368 therefore regulation or providing restrictions cannot be held as ultravires of the constitution.